1887
PDF

Abstract

Summary

Carbon isotope profiles for biomarkers in early Pleistocene lake sediments from Olduvai Gorge document environmental changes associated with alternating wet/dry cycles during a critical episode in hominin evolution. Site 2A of the Olduvai Gorge Coring Project recovered the stratigraphic succession between the Bed I Basalt (∼1.90 Ma) and Tuff IB (∼1.85 Ma) consisting of lacustrine claystones with high Corg contents (avg. 2.5 %). The sequence displays temporal shifts in d13Corg reflecting changes in organic matter (OM) sources. Stratigraphic profiles for d13C values of plant waxes n-alkanes are consistent throughout wet/dry cycles indicating temporal stability in savanna vegetation, refuting evidence for an increase in C4 grasses during drier intervals. d13C values for n-alkanes from aquatic macrophytes increase during drier intervals, whereas higher d13C values for algal biomarkers (sterenes, alkenones) record use of bicarbonate triggered by enhanced lake alkalinity. d13Corg profiles reflect variations in inputs of terrestrial versus aquatic OM during wet/dry cycles, mirrored by hop-17(21)-ene derived from heterotrophic bacteria utilizing sedimentary OM. Thus, d13C records from Paleolake Olduvai sediments show changes in OM sources rather than shifts in the proportion of C3/C4 plants, indicating that intervals of high climate variability do not necessarily cause changes in savanna vegetation affecting hominin habitats.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202533245
2025-09-07
2026-02-08
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/2214-4609/2025/imog-2025/245.html?itemId=/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202533245&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Hay, 1976. Geology of the Olduvai Gorge, University of California Press, 203 pp.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Leakey et al., 1971. doi:10.1038/232308a0
    https://doi.org/10.1038/232308a0
  3. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1520-6505(1998)7:3<81::AID-EVAN3>3.0.CO;2-A
  4. Maslin et al., 2014. doi:10.1016/j.quascirev.2014.06.012
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2014.06.012
  5. Deino et al., 2021. doi:10.1016/j.palaeo.2020.109990
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2020.109990
  6. deMenocal, 2011. doi:10.1126/science.1190683
    https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1190683
  7. Shultz & Maslin, 2013. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0076750
    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0076750
  8. Ashley et al., 2009. doi:10.1016/j.palaeo.2008.10.016
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2008.10.016
  9. Stancampiano et al., 2022. doi:10.1038/s41598‑022‑14031‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-14031-1
  10. Deocampo et al., 2017. doi:10.1130/g38950.1
    https://doi.org/10.1130/g38950.1
  11. Njau et al., 2012. doi:10.1016/j.palaeo.2020.110059
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2020.110059
  12. Magill et al., 2013. doi:10.1073/pnas.1206276110
    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1206276110
  13. Colcord et al., 2018. doi:10.1016/j.palaeo.2018.01.023
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2018.01.023
  14. Colcord et al., 2019. doi:10.1016/j.palaeo.2019.04.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2019.04.001
  15. Shilling et al., 2019. doi:10.1016/j.palaeo.2019.109267
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2019.109267
  16. Shilling et al., 2020. doi:10.1016/j.palaeo.2020.109824
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2020.109824
  17. Brassell et al., 2022. doi:10.1016/j.palaeo.2020.109824
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2020.109824
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202533245
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202533245
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error